Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 2753. page

File: IMG_0210.jpg (934KB, 2734x2514px) Image search: [Google]

934KB, 2734x2514px

Society collapses, you have to live in the woods now. You can only take one weapon with you. What are you taking?

File: 20161117_234714.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

Hey /k/ I need some assistance. I'm not very well versed on old firearms, especially Japanese ones. This rifle belonged to my grandfather, but I have no idea what I am looking at.

It still has the chrysanthemum on it, and some japanese but I have no clue what it says. I figure it's chambered in 6.5 jap.

Apart from being sporterized (disgusting) it seems to be in working order apart from years of dust.

Any input or info? What type of rifle is it?

It is pretty short which makes me think it may be a calvary carbine. And it still has a front sight which doesn't look like a straight up Arisaka infantry rifle.

File: WW1 rifles.png (693KB, 1513x600px) Image search: [Google]

693KB, 1513x600px

Tell me /k/, did I do it right?

Also post your own, let's get a nice thread started.

File: 1437118620943 (1).jpg (186KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 500x376px

Ask a guy who just bought a VEPR 54R and a Kahr PM9 anything

Recent Purchases thread. What did you buy recently /k/?

File: handguncartridges.jpg (315KB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 3000x2000px

It's time to let go of .45 ACP. This cartridge is mathematically inferior to 9mm and .40 S&W

Loaded at 60% the pressure of standard 9mm loads, the muzzle energy of 9mm and .45 are similar, yet with the .45 you sacrifice 5 to 9 rounds of magazine capacity, so all you get is a diameter advantage of 0.1 inch and a negligible edge in muzzle energy. This is not a good trade off at all.

When loaded at the pressure of 9mm +P, .45 ACP gets close to .44 magnum in terms of energy. This further proves that the .45 ACP is an oversized watered-down cartridge.

Most handguns with double stack magazines can only fit 10 rounds of .45 ACP, that's only three more than a 1911. This is because the size of the cartridge doesn't favor use in doublestack magazines. The FNP holds 15, but is notable for having an enormous grip

There is no concrete reason to use the .45 ACP anymore, except for military use. inb4 supressors, any 147gr loads for 9mm and 180gr for .40 S&W are subsonic

File: IMG_0377.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

Just got this bad boy.
CZ thread.

File: 20161111_225853~01.jpg (3MB, 4785x2968px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4785x2968px

So, /k/ I'm turning to you after much research on this subject turning up nothing definitive, hopefully this hasn't been an overdone topic.

I drive a lot, and wear tucked in shirts at work, I am a college student and money is tight, but I saved for a while and got a shield, a CC permit, and two holsters I've tried are the alien gear cloaktuck 1.0, and a bladetech klipt kydex holster.

I tend to go with the bladetech since I now prefer appendix carry, being as I am 5'8 145-150lb, pretty small, no gut, and I feel nervous about printing wearing at 4-5 o clock. But it gets uncomfortable driving with AIWB for more than a few min at a time.

Is it just because I have a cheap ass shit holster? Would a leather/softer one work better? Or should i go with something less traditional like the smart carry (where it sits next to your crotch below the belt line?

Thanks in advance you edgelords

File: IMG_6004.jpg (37KB, 313x470px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 313x470px

Why is saving the human race multiple times not enough to get this enlisted guy recommended to OCS /k/?

File: 1475693434844.jpg (231KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1024x768px

If you only were allowed to buy guns from one firearm manufacturer for the rest of your life which one would you chose?

File: 1473207736203.jpg (243KB, 2738x1825px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 2738x1825px

threaded barrel thread

lets get a good list of the best pistols and rifles with suppressors to look for

File: 20161118_064741.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

Guess that gun thread. Goo

File: B1_bis_-Flandres-.jpg (2MB, 3072x2304px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x2304px

Let's discuss the cool shit the Frenchies did.
Pic related.

File: 1451280133321.jpg (91KB, 500x392px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x392px

Sup /k/, I know literally nothing about guns except that they fire bullets. I just moved to the city and I realized I don't want to walk around without a gun in case I find myself at the mercy of some amphetamine addicted bum. I'm looking for something small and compact for under $300, I was thinking maybe a little snub nose revolver but you guys are the experts. Any recommendations?

File: 23tfsi.png (64KB, 1031x365px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1031x365px

How effective would the Lexington-class battlecruisers have been if they had been completed and used in warfare? They were intended to be quite fast for their day with a top speed of 33 - 35 knots, much faster than any other warship of this size in the world at that time. They were to be armed with (4 x 2) 16-inch/50 caliber guns and a large number of secondary 6-inch guns for taking out smaller threats like torpedo boats. However, they were to have just 5 - 7 inches of armor to make the ship light enough to travel at high speeds. So what we have here is a design for a very fast, very well-armed, but comparatively fragile warship. (The design also includes 21-inch torpedo tubes)

Hulls for the ships were laid down, but ultimately they were converted to aircraft carriers before being completed due to some treaty or something. But if they had been made, would they have been good ships? Would they have been useful in ocean warfare?